Why the working class predominately voted Leave? (Primary research by SLS)

On June 23rd 2016 the UK voted on whether or not to leave the European Union. The voter turnout was the highest since the 1992 General Election which saw John Major elected as the first Conservative Prime Minister since Margaret Thatcher.

The nation awoke on June 24th to find that the Leave Vote had won and that the UK would be activating Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, gaining independence from the EU. That same morning David Cameron, having delivered on his 2015 General Election Manifesto promise of an in-out referendum, resigned as Prime Minister triggering a Conservative leadership election, the first since 2005.

On July 11th Theresa May became leader of the Conservative Party and became the UK’s second female Prime Minister. In a speech shortly after winning she stated ‘Brexit means Brexit and we’re going to make a success of it.’

Following the results of the referendum and the political fallout from it, one of the key questions asked was why did 17,410,742 people vote to leave the European Union?

One of the reasons that the UK voted to leave was that the British working classes predominately sided with the Leave Campaign.

SLS the behaviour and cultural insight agency wanted to find out why the majority of the working class voted Leave? As such, SLS conducted a number of qualitative interviews in Bolton, Boston and Feltham to find the answers.

For the purposes of this research, let us establish what is mean by the term ‘Working Class’.

There are three types of working class as defined in the research carried out; Struggling, Salt of the Earth, and Aspirational. Struggling are those with emotional or financial problems, who live in chaos, have low confidence, and are disenfranchised with society. The Salt of the Earth have a strong work ethic, have very ‘black and white’ attitudes, take pride in themselves, and enjoy traditional working class activities such as going to the pub or the bingo. Finally, Aspirational working class have a strong drive for their children to succeed, wish to change their lives for the better, have an old fashioned moral compass, are willing to make sacrifices so that their children will have a better future, and have more traditionally middle class interests such as going to the theatre.

All three types are unified in a dislike of how they are represented by the media (as chavs), tend to work in jobs that are more physically strenuous rather than intellectually demanding, consider themselves natural gamblers, and tend to be straight talking. Political figures such as Nigel Farage and Margaret Thatcher resonant with them and their tendency to be socially Conservative.

With a decline in UK manufacturing, amongst other aspect, there was been a decline in those classified as traditional working class, so it is no surprise that it is this social class that is usually associated as having a fear of change and a strong sense of nostalgia.

It has already been mentioned that the turnout for this referendum was the highest since the 1992 General Election, but why was voter turnout so high?

The issue of Europe and the UK’s membership to the European Union has always been one about which the public feels strongly. The issue is such an important one that there is a political party whose raison d’être is to ensure that the UK does not remain a member of the EU. The passion that this issue creates is one of the reasons the people of the UK turned out to vote.

Another is the fact that this was a referendum rather than a General Election or local council election. Many of those interviewed perceived this referendum as a once in a lifetime opportunity to vote on something that would make a real difference to the future of the UK. With a regular election there is a possibility to have one political party in power for 5 years and after 5 years vote for a completely different line up, effectively reverse the decisions of the previous government. On June 23rd this was not the case.

Interestingly, the results of the referendum highlighted the clear divide between London and the rest of England. It has often been said that there is a Westminster Bubble and that those in Government have no idea what the rest of England thinks, the issues effecting them, and that there is a failure to recognise the opinions expressed outside of the M25. The fact that the London region was the only region in England and Wales to vote to remain part of the EU confirmed this.

Given that the Remain Campaign had the support of the Government and other influential individuals, why did the Leave Campaign resonate with the working class?

Linking in with the previous comments about the Westminster Bubble, many of those interviewed expressed a distrust of the government (both local and central) and did not see them as competent enough to make decisions which impact on the whole country. In essence they said words to the effect ‘if they are for it, I am against it’. It was also suggested that those in Westminster simply did not respect the working class and their point of view, basically disregarding their opinions if different to their own.

Some interviewed also mentioned that they did not view the EU decision makers as being competent and well enough informed to pass laws that impact on the UK when they are not British or based in the UK. The high levels of youth unemployment and economic problems in EU countries such as Greece, Italy and Spain were given as examples of this.

Of all the issues raised during the EU referendum immigration was cited as the greatest concern by those interviewed as it had the biggest knock on effect on housing, jobs, the welfare system, school places, and the NHS. There was a consensus from this audiences that when this issue was raised society/the media would label you as being racist and you would be stigmatised for expressing your concern.

It was for this reason that the use of celebrities to endorse the Remain cause was perceived to further alienate those in the working class. Figures such as Sir Bob Geldof and David Beckham created the biggest reaction amongst those interviewed.

In the run up to polling day a strange event took place – there was a flotilla battle on the Thames. A fleet of fisherman sailed up the Thames to Westminster to raise awareness of the rules and regulations imposed on those in the fishing industry, and how leaving the EU would give the opportunity to relax the laws. This fleet was met by boats full of those working on the Remain Campaign including Sir Bob Geldof, protesting the fisherman. It was considered by those interviewed as hypercritical that those raising awareness of real issues effecting their work were shouted over by a wealthy man with a lack of understanding of the situation.

Former England footballer David Beckham’s support for the Remain Campaign triggered a similar response. Being a multimillionaire David Beckham would be able to afford private medical care, owns more than one house, and has the money to send his children to private school should he wish. A shortage of places at the local school, being passed over for social housing, or waiting over 2 weeks to see a GP would be problems he simply would not experience first-hand, but was asking those who were to vote not to leave the EU ergo asking people to vote not to have the opportunity to reform the situation but stick with the status quo.

One of the reasons the Leave Campaign connected with the working class was that it was straight talking with a clear aim. The campaign played to the fear of change and a sense of nostalgia. Trusted institutions like the NHS were cited as being able to directly benefit if the UK voted for her independence. It has previously been stated that those in the working class are natural gamblers, many perceived voting to leave the EU as a gamble. However, they viewed it as a gamble that would pay off and that would ultimately benefit their children in the long run.

Those interviewed considered that the fallout from the result of the vote solidified their feelings about the Remain Campaign, how they were viewed by them, and the lack of respect towards the working class. The consensus on social media websites, such as Facebook and Twitter, was that only those who were uneducated and ignorant would have voted to leave, and as such their opinions and reasons for voting to leave did not count and that in light of this a second referendum should be held.

The distain for those who voted to leave reached a peak when those over 65 were targeted and there was a call for their vote to count for less than someone in their twenties. The reasoning being that they were statistically more likely to die in the next 10-20 years and thus would not feel the impact of leaving the EU. Those interviewed were horrified by this, and it was pointed out that this was the generation who had fought in World War II to ensure that we today have the freedom to vote in free and democratic elections.

This again created amongst this audience feeling of hypocrisy – I am not allowed to raise the issue of immigration without being called racist, but you can attack the older generation and not be called ageist or prejudist. Once again reiterating the feeling of a lack of respect towards the working class.

Article 50 has yet to be triggered but one lesson that should be learnt from the referendum campaign by both sides is not to ignore or underestimate the feelings of the working class. In the end they could win or lose you an election.